About your Search

20120926
20121004
Search Results 0 to 9 of about 10 (some duplicates have been removed)
: in the book, jim write of preparing opening questions for the 1992 three-way debate between george h.w. bush, bill clinton, and ross pero. >> i will ask questions for the first half under rules that permit. >> to get things going he wanted to question along the same line apples to apples for the candidates. this one time, kate was on a book tour so they stalked by phone not long before the start of the debate. >> lehrer: i called kate and ran through those three questions and there was dead silence on the phone. and i thought uh-oh. i really don't need this. i said, okay, what is it?" i was not terribly polite about it. and she said, "well, you have two apples and an owner." that was one of the hardest calls i ever made. i knew he was in his zone. he felt really good about his questions. he was really up. and that's a split-second decision. as he says in the book, he called me back to tell me by the time he got there that i'd been right and it was okay. in the meantime, i got aanda, our youngest daughter, and i said we've got to go for a walk. we've got to go for a walk. we got out, and iç
the debates, but george w. bush exceeded his expectations and did fine. four years later, john kerry at least in some of the eyes probably was a better debater but didn't necessarily matter. chuck is right, it is difficult to reset it. but there are a lot of voters who are completely fine with a new president, i think, even some people who voted for president obama. i was talking to a voter a week ago in wisconsin and said he voted for obama four years ago and not sure at all. he is open to voting for governor romney if he knew what he stood for. that is governor romney's charge here to put some meat on the bones of what he stands for on his policies. and people are open to that. >> jim, imagine yourself as a debate moderator this week and put on your mask and go with it. what kind of questions would you like to see these candidates address that will actually speak to the concerns you hear voters have about the future of this country? >> there is one question and i don't want to tell jim what to do but ask it different ways, and that is how in the world what you are proposing enough to get th
many more lives and fighting so much useless battles. that was the disaster of the george w. bush administration. seems like romney is intent on taking us straight back to that. tavis: if he were sitting in the moderator's chair to run morrowt your political ideology aside, what do think the american people need to here with the issues that matter to it and the issues that you write about in "the price of civilization", and what would you like to see the two of them go at it? what would you like to see front and center tomorrow night in this conversation? what kinds of questions would you deposing to them? >> of course, the most important issue for the american people is how we are going to create sustainable and fair and equitable recovery, a recovery that and really embraces all of the people including people who are very poor and are hurting. so i would ask mitt romney how in the midst of all of this, when we do not begin to have the revenues that we need when we are collecting the smallest share of our national income in taxes since the 1940's, why mr. romney, do you propose a
wrong in a debate with george w. bush in 2000. you can see gore advancing threatening toward the bush who would later win the presidency after a battle over vote counting. i cannot imagine anything like that happening tonight. in fact, the opposite. these are very cool customers. how should they loosened up without making that mistake? >> al gore had the unfortunate personality -- he resembled a tin woodman when he was in front of the camera. i cannot believe that his approaching president bush was as big a deal as some would think that it was. but, he did it at the wrong time. >> right. very very briefly. these are two of the most televised men in the world. will we learn anything new about them? >> tonight's candidates, i think that we will. the way that they behave, the way they present themselves will make a significant difference. >> i will have to stop you there. thank you very much indeed for joining me. that brings us to the end of the show. thank you very much for watching. we will see you back here tomorrow. >> make sense of international news at bbc.com/news. >> funding for
time with his audible sighs when george w bush was talking, how did i have to end up on the same stage with this guy. and staublinged him in the third debate and walked over and innovate-- invaded his airspace. people said i'm not comfortable with that, because he doesn't seem comfortable with himself. >> i would say he hurt himself, al gore in that case, but i do not believe any campaign has ever been turned on debates. if you look at the predebate polls, the person a led in those predebate polls has won just about every election. so people hurt themselves, they go up and down a little. george bush lost at least two, probably three debates to john kerry, still beat him in the general so i am less persuaded the debates are foundational to any election. >> woodruff: one other thing i want to ask you about, more attention this week to international news. we are the u.n. general assembly, the speech by the iranian leader, the speech by prime minister netanyahu of israel, the president spoke. that's now in the air, today and yesterday romney's campaigning in sort of a military setting. cou
contender worthy of the white house. it's happened before. john kennedy, ronald reagan, george w. bush, all bounced higher in the polls after credible debate performances and went on to win the white house. whatever the outcome, most agree it's the debates that will give us our best opportunity to evaluate these candidates, sort out their positions and separate truth from fiction. not a moment too soon. according to a new survey from the annenberg public policy center at the university of pennsylvania, with a little over a month to go before election day, the public has a lot to learn about the 2012 presidential race. among its findings, only 51% know the romney-ryan plan would preserve traditional medicare for those 55 and older and retain it as an option for those now younger than that. only about half knew that mitt romney would keep the bush tax cuts in place. fewer than half knew that romney and not obama had promised to increase defense spending. only 23% were aware that payroll taxes had decreased during obama's term in office. only slightly more than half knew that paul ryan is the
. >> sreenivasan: this doctor was the medicare medicaid chief under president george w. bush. he now heads the health policy center at the brookings institution and sees merit in romney's ideas. >> they could move towards innovative ways of delivering care like doing more to provide nursing home type services at home, like doing more to prevent the the complications of conditions like asthma by sending nurses to patients' homes and helping them modify the home to prevent the emergency room visit. >> sreenivasan: governor romney has not spelled out whether he would allow local officials to deny medicaid to some current patients altogether or restrict health benefits they now receive. romney also says he would not have medicaid spending keep pace with projected health care inflation. in the all likelihood, a romney administration also would not provide additional funds to cover more recipients during a recession. in contrast to how the law currently works. president obama argues that romney's proposal would cut coverage and services to the needy including seniors. >> here's the deal the stat
Search Results 0 to 9 of about 10 (some duplicates have been removed)